Jamie Oliver is this year’s winner of the TED prize. Past recipients range from Billy Graham to Richard Dawkins. The basic modus operandi of the TED conference and the prize is that the recipient receives a large sum of money to spend however they like. The intention, of course, is to pick altruistic and intelligent people who need funding without any agenda or political motivation behind it. This year’s recipient is Jamie Oliver, AKA, the Naked Chef.

Oliver, or as I should say, Sir Oliver has made it his own personal crusade to improve food quality and to fight obesity. He began his fight over in the UK and has taken it here believing that others will follow our lead. He has received massive support from the TED prize to a new ABC show and even joining hands with Michelle Obama. Needless to say he is not for want of personal wealth or outside funding. He is an extremely successful business man who raised himself up from working in a pub to being a multi-millionaire, in other words, he understands business. Oliver has thrived in the free market capitalist system that most moral crusaders, like Michael Moore, attempt to change. He, on the other hand, is trying to use it.

Oliver believes that a real change of values will not come from above like the hortatory campaigns of “Just say no”, or D.A.R.E. rather he believes that change will come from a general grass roots conversion of values that will reshape broadly how Americans think, eat, and most importantly spend. In a very similar fashion to the effect of Upton Sinclaire’s The Jungle, Oliver hopes that his new T.V. show will change the value sets of Americans. The idea that Americans will demand greater accountability from their food vendors is not something is entirely new or unheard of. Also, he makes the point that these companies are not bent on killing you, merely making a profit. If people decide to buy food from a healthier restaurant then the market will move as such.

A liberal market economy is much like an ecosystem; animals will live in an area where they can most readily survive. So too will businesses; if there is no market for selling rancid food then the rancid food vendors will go out of business. Oliver’s point is well taken; change must come from below and be aimed at the values of consumers. Education, options, and most of all, awareness are required for this change to happen. This is where government can come in. Once value sets are changed people will vote accordingly and regulations, like the creation of the FDA after Sinclair’s novel, will be passed. Also, education will change; at least Oliver hopes so, to facilitate more cooking and awareness of nutrition.

Hopefully Oliver succeeds on his quest to make food healthier, but I think that his manner of questing seems to be revolutionary. It’s not directed at any specific group nor is it taking on some variety of moralism, but it is basically practical. It hits America where it hurts: the wallet. Make it no longer profitable to sell bad food and no more bad food will be sold. The most effective way of changing things is not to yell at people or to lecture, but rather to convince them. The reason why the war on drugs has been slow and the fight against global warming stagnant is that they both appear to be shoved down people’s throats. It would not be profitable to take on these issues for companies or private individuals as is. Therefore, you need to make it profitable to change rather than not; move the market and you change people.